On Wednesday, New Hampshire’s House of Representatives proved its approbation of protecting its state’s citizens’ right to a fair trial by passing HB399. The bill, known as the “Liberty Preservation Act, was introduced by Representative Dan Itse and was passed with a 337-15 vote. If passed by the state’s Senate and Governor, the legislation would block the indefinite detention provision of the 2012 NDAA bill that President Obama signed into law at the end of 2011.

Specifically, the bill describes that it “finds that the enactment into law by the Untied States Congress of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 is inimical to the liberty, security, and well-being of the people of New Hampshire.”

The bill goes on to read that it finds that “Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, as they purport to authorize detainment of persons captured within the United States of America without charge, military tribunals for persons captured within the United States of America, and the transfer of persons captured within the United States of America to foreign jurisdictions, are violative of” the American people’s constitutional rights. Rights violative by the NDAA are listed as habeas corpus, the First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, Eighth Amendment, and Fourteenth Amendment.

The Liberty Preservation Act, which will take effect as law upon its passage, explains that the state of New Hampshire will not take part in any way with the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA within the state’s boundaries. It also declares that the state’s safety department must report to the governor and legislature “any attempt by agencies or agents of the United States government to secure the implementation” of the NDAA “through the operations of that or any other state department.”

If passed, the bill would make so that any public official, employee or New Hampshire government worker who makes an attempt to enforce any form of law or regulation in violation of the state’s protection against NDAA indefinite detention, would be guilty of a class A misdemeanor.